Willingness to pay for physician services: Comparing estimates from a discrete choice experiment and contingent valuation
Discrete choice experiments (DCE) and contingent valuation (CV) are often applied to value health care benefits. However, whether the two techniques yield converging willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates is not studied well. This study aims to compare at a disaggregated level WTP estimates for physician services obtained from DCE and CV estimates. We study the consistency between the estimates and whether there are systematic differences between the two. The analysis is based on data from a household survey in Ukraine that includes 303 respondents and is taken to be representative of the Ukrainian population. The respondents participated in both DCE (16 choice tasks) and CV (4 valuation scenarios) in a form of payment scale followed by open-ended questions about the exact maximum WTP. We find that DCE produces higher WTP estimates than CV does, and the estimates are not consistent across the two techniques. A difference between the WTP estimates from DCE over those derived from the CV technique is found (i) for respondents who do not discriminate well between the profiles, and (ii) for an increase in the presented attribute level changes. The implications for achieving better convergence between the WTP estimates from the two techniques are discussed.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 34 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
|Note:||The study is financed by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Program, Theme 8 Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities, Project ASSPRO CEE 2007 (Grant Agreement no. 217431). The content of the publication is the sole responsibility of the authors and it in no way represents the views of the Commission or its services.|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.akkrt.hu|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Akadémiai Kiadó Zrt., Prielle K. u. 21-35. Budapest, 1117, Hungary|
Web: http://www.akademiai.com Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aka:soceco:v:34:y:2012:i:2:p:339-357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Vajda, Lőrinc)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.